If some groups can get off without jail for rape, but some other groups are thrown in prison for posting the wrong opinion, then it’s got NOTHING to do with deterring crime or serving justice, but about oppressing a group of people based on their race.
Whilst I think he’s a moron, I’m trying to think about the legality aspects here because if that’s illegal, then about a million people in the U.K. are guilty of sharing inflammatory Palastine / Isreal content which literally provokes protests and violence we’ve seen, and as we know – plenty more will come. Would criticising religion fall under this!? (You know, the made up shit that nobodies been able to prove in thousands of years).
Keirs set a stupid precedent now, would need to treble prison space in a matter of months at this rate.
Everyone can just go around tagging police now right for what people have put online on social media? Some people are going to get away with it, others are not – and you can bet there will be bias to it.
Goodluck police.
[deleted]
It’s extremely dangerous that saying or sharing anything that someone might find offensive is now potentially a criminal offence that can earn you a fine and/or prison time.
This is a chilling threat to freedom of expression, and is a recipe for selective and arbitrary prosecution – with most not being charged but the state singling out some individuals for punishment. Either to make an example, or even worse for political motivations.
The police must have solved all the crime and now they’re ready to stop people saying or thinking mean things.
I mean, I don’t agree with what the person posted, but I’d sooner the fucking useless police actually solve crimes instead of just going for the low hanging fruit.
The UK needed a detox from the time the Tory party started using the same language as the Far Right. It’s happening now and to some it’s a shock that their language incites hate but it’s an important progression. We are meant to evolve and hopefully do better as we do.
Edit: There is a Two-Tier justice system and that will be seen by the sentences here and those for the Tottenham riots, as can be seen below. Two-Tier Kier may roll of the tongue but it’s actually that sentencing here is way less than happened in Tottenham. I know that doesn’t fit much of the narrative of this Sub, but the evidence is clear if you care to look.
Examples like: Despite having no criminal record, London student Nicolas Robinson, 23, was jailed for six months for stealing a £3.50 (€4.70) case of bottled water during a night of rioting in south London.
and then:
On Tuesday two men were jailed for four years for using Facebook to incite riots…
*A District Judge sitting at Carlisle’s Rickergate court jailed 31-year-old Billy Thompson after hearing that his Facebook message responded to news of a city centre dispersal order to prevent disorder with the words “Filthy ****ards.”*
*The comment was accompanied by emojis showing an ethnic minority person and a gun.*
*Imposing a 12-week jail term, District Judge John Temperley told the defendant, from Victory Crescent, Maryport, that there had to be a deterrent sentence to discourage the kind of violent behaviour that such messages encouraged.*
*Thompson pleaded guilty to an allegation of posting an offensive or menacing message as defined by the Communications Act.*
*District Judge Temperley told the defendant: “It may be right that the starting point [sentence] is a community order for this offence but I am afraid this has to be viewed within the context of the current civil unrest up and down the country.*
*“I have no doubt at all that your post was connected to that wider picture; I don’t accept that your comment and emojis were directed at the police.*
*“Your comments on arrest clearly demonstrated to me that there was a racial element to the message and the post of those images. That has to be reflected in the sentence…*
*”There needs to be a deterrent element in the sentence I impose because this sort of behaviour has to stop.*
*“To encourage others to behave in the same way ultimately leads to the sort of problems on the streets we have seen in so many places up and down the country.*
*”It is serious enough for custody.” The defendant, of Victory Crescent, Maryport, will be released at the halfway point in his sentence, when he will be obliged to pay a £154 surcharge.*
This reminds me of how “laws” work in ruzia. The definition of the law is so fluctuating that anyone can be prosecuted for anything. Like their lgbt-propaganda law. Anything can be considered lgbt-propaganda if needed – from haircut to a hug, you don’t even need to make out in public or hold a poster. Or recent “spreading fakes about the army” law where they can put anyone who’s against the war into jail for 7years. Or a “foreign agent” law.
The idea of this laws is that they could be implemented against anyone because their definitions are very unclear.
If anyone can be bothered to read the judge’s summing up, this guy made it clear on arrest and in interview that the comments were racially aggravated and not political. He’s legally entitled to have racist views, even to share them to some degree. However, he is not legally entitled to post racist content deliberately created to incite racial hatred at the exact time when violent riots are taking place due to racial hatred. That is what this guy pleaded guilty to.
Kind of important to note that it’s likely to be in the broader context of other behaviour of his, some of which was reported in the story.
I really don’t care if I get flack for this, but I truly believe that what Starmer’s currently doing is a very, very slippery slope toward George Orwell-level shit.
Getting arrested for something as benign as this, is a fucking joke. Getting arrested for being near the scene of some of these riots, even if you did nothing, is a fucking joke.
It’s also hilarious that we keep being told the police are spread too thin and jails are at capacity, hence why they’re (apparently) going to lower terms and whatnot, yet within a week a ton of people are arrested and sentenced for some shitty social media posts? What?
If you get burgled or mugged, you might just about get a crime reference if you’re lucky and end-of, but showing clips of darker-skinned people walking the streets with machetes and voicing concerns about it and a week later you’re in jail?
The law states if a post is ***LIKELY*** to stir up racial hatred, it is an offence. So not that it has been definitely proven that racial hatred/violence broke out as a result of the post, it’s only down if it is likely to.
Who decides whether it is likely to or not? The state.
We have descended into an authoritarian state. Both Cons & Labour are to blame for this.
Being a dick should be a civil matter, not a criminal matter. The government shouldn’t be controlling this sort of shit.
Chap does sound like the cancer of social media, though, and my anti-Facebook bias is telling me we should ban every one of these weirdos who share political memes and opinions on social media. Sorry mum, that includes you.
Thing is, you can express all sorts of political opinions without demonising your opposition. You can engage in erudite discussions about the pros and cons of most things. I do this at the regular dinner parties I hold.
Problem is many people on Facebook etc can’t do this. They are simple people trying to express what they feel and get criminalised for it because they express themselves in ways that certain segments of society find unacceptable.
Maybe, if we invested in education, these people could join in the accepted political discourse and have their voices heard.
Kind of reminds me of the Pontius pilate jesus story.
With them recently reducing sentences of killers it’s almost like they want to lock up the ones saying words they don’t like in exchange for the freedom of the violent prisoners.
To me he is obviously a horrible person but you ought to be free to say whatever you want. At some level we must be free to discuss anything. Freedom of speech is so important to society. But I’ve seen the trouble that lies and hatred can cause. What’s the answer?
section 217 of the communications act,
it has been misused for ages now and people online were warning about it but they got called names, so no one dealt with it and now here we are.
seems like shaming people trying to warn you about issues has gone poorly in the UK.
shame
People who cheered Boris and his anti free speech Online Safety Act
Are angry at Keir Starmer… for what now?
Maybe you should have scrutinised the guy you wanted to act as a president instead of sniping at a guy who has been in charge 2mins and hasn’t changed a single law on this matter, including the slippery slope Tory ones
Do you remember the ladies who wore pictures of paragliders on their back-packs at the pro-Palestine protests shortly after October 7? Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe they only got suspended sentences.
Personally, I don’t agree with the criminal charges and sentences in both cases. I believe in free speech unless it’s a direct call for violence. I know the law in the UK says otherwise, which is a pity.
I’m also an immigrant, I’m not Muslim, but I have Muslim family members, if that matters. I’m originally from a post-communist country, and I grew up with people often repeating a joke from communist times, “Today I woke up, looked out my window at the prison across my house and made a political joke about the ruling regime. Tomorrow, I woke up and looked out the window at my house.”
I know we are not there yet, obviously, but reading these articles surely makes me think we are steadily headed that way, especially after the whole Covid lockdown fiasco. Am I allowed to say that? I honestly don’t know, and that scares me.
He’s also been twice jailed before for beating up a cab driver and another guy… feel like there’s more to this story that’s not been reported
I’ve seen a lot of people get arrested for whatever they say online now more, especially that one video of some guy getting arrested for misuse of electronic communications over social media or something like that. I’m not even sure whether to be against it or support it.
“I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
-Voltaire, one of the founders of liberalism.
What is happening to our nation? What happened to the inalienable rights of man to express themselves freely? Freedom of speech risks offence, but that’s a lot better an alternative to a population scared to open their mouths, strangled by an oppressive authoritarian regime that can lock you up for a differing opinion.
So let’s say a Ukrainian guy in Ukraine started posting online pictures of Russians with weapons with the caption “coming to a town near you” before the war then the invasion happened, would that be stirring racial hate and he should be jailed?
If you can’t express your opinion without calling for innocent people to be harmed maybe you should keep your opinion to yourself. Just as your freedom to swing your arms end at someone else’s face, your freedom of speech ends at the point your speech can endanger others. You can cry about it all you like, but you’re in the wrong.
I can only hope it was taking into account his previous convictions and character. I understand they are making an example of people before inciting hatred; but once we’ve gone full restriction of free expression in case it offends the wrong people, then we have a big problem. I’m worried that Charlie Hebdo style satire would now be illegal to publish in the uk.
Am guessing we didn’t see right wing thugs causing riots the last two weeks ?
Freedom of expression does not mean freedom of responsibility, if you’re deliberately stirring up hatred you put others at risk
26 comments
It’s not the what, it’s the who.
If some groups can get off without jail for rape, but some other groups are thrown in prison for posting the wrong opinion, then it’s got NOTHING to do with deterring crime or serving justice, but about oppressing a group of people based on their race.
Whilst I think he’s a moron, I’m trying to think about the legality aspects here because if that’s illegal, then about a million people in the U.K. are guilty of sharing inflammatory Palastine / Isreal content which literally provokes protests and violence we’ve seen, and as we know – plenty more will come. Would criticising religion fall under this!? (You know, the made up shit that nobodies been able to prove in thousands of years).
Keirs set a stupid precedent now, would need to treble prison space in a matter of months at this rate.
Everyone can just go around tagging police now right for what people have put online on social media? Some people are going to get away with it, others are not – and you can bet there will be bias to it.
Goodluck police.
[deleted]
It’s extremely dangerous that saying or sharing anything that someone might find offensive is now potentially a criminal offence that can earn you a fine and/or prison time.
This is a chilling threat to freedom of expression, and is a recipe for selective and arbitrary prosecution – with most not being charged but the state singling out some individuals for punishment. Either to make an example, or even worse for political motivations.
The police must have solved all the crime and now they’re ready to stop people saying or thinking mean things.
I mean, I don’t agree with what the person posted, but I’d sooner the fucking useless police actually solve crimes instead of just going for the low hanging fruit.
The UK needed a detox from the time the Tory party started using the same language as the Far Right. It’s happening now and to some it’s a shock that their language incites hate but it’s an important progression. We are meant to evolve and hopefully do better as we do.
Edit: There is a Two-Tier justice system and that will be seen by the sentences here and those for the Tottenham riots, as can be seen below. Two-Tier Kier may roll of the tongue but it’s actually that sentencing here is way less than happened in Tottenham. I know that doesn’t fit much of the narrative of this Sub, but the evidence is clear if you care to look.
Examples like: Despite having no criminal record, London student Nicolas Robinson, 23, was jailed for six months for stealing a £3.50 (€4.70) case of bottled water during a night of rioting in south London.
and then:
On Tuesday two men were jailed for four years for using Facebook to incite riots…
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14553330](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14553330)
This isn’t new in the UK. It’s just that for many of you it’s now a little closer to home.
He did plead guilty to an offence. [https://www.whitehavennews.co.uk/news/24513379.sellafield-worker-jailed-sharing-offensive-facebook-posts/](https://www.whitehavennews.co.uk/news/24513379.sellafield-worker-jailed-sharing-offensive-facebook-posts/)
If you plead guilty, then you are not going to be able to question if it is an offence.
Another man pleaded guilty about another facebook post – (also unwise to make comments at the Police Station) [https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/24506682.maryport-man-jailed-facebook-post-police-bid-stop-disorder/](https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/24506682.maryport-man-jailed-facebook-post-police-bid-stop-disorder/)
*A District Judge sitting at Carlisle’s Rickergate court jailed 31-year-old Billy Thompson after hearing that his Facebook message responded to news of a city centre dispersal order to prevent disorder with the words “Filthy ****ards.”*
*The comment was accompanied by emojis showing an ethnic minority person and a gun.*
*Imposing a 12-week jail term, District Judge John Temperley told the defendant, from Victory Crescent, Maryport, that there had to be a deterrent sentence to discourage the kind of violent behaviour that such messages encouraged.*
*Thompson pleaded guilty to an allegation of posting an offensive or menacing message as defined by the Communications Act.*
*District Judge Temperley told the defendant: “It may be right that the starting point [sentence] is a community order for this offence but I am afraid this has to be viewed within the context of the current civil unrest up and down the country.*
*“I have no doubt at all that your post was connected to that wider picture; I don’t accept that your comment and emojis were directed at the police.*
*“Your comments on arrest clearly demonstrated to me that there was a racial element to the message and the post of those images. That has to be reflected in the sentence…*
*”There needs to be a deterrent element in the sentence I impose because this sort of behaviour has to stop.*
*“To encourage others to behave in the same way ultimately leads to the sort of problems on the streets we have seen in so many places up and down the country.*
*”It is serious enough for custody.” The defendant, of Victory Crescent, Maryport, will be released at the halfway point in his sentence, when he will be obliged to pay a £154 surcharge.*
This reminds me of how “laws” work in ruzia. The definition of the law is so fluctuating that anyone can be prosecuted for anything. Like their lgbt-propaganda law. Anything can be considered lgbt-propaganda if needed – from haircut to a hug, you don’t even need to make out in public or hold a poster. Or recent “spreading fakes about the army” law where they can put anyone who’s against the war into jail for 7years. Or a “foreign agent” law.
The idea of this laws is that they could be implemented against anyone because their definitions are very unclear.
If anyone can be bothered to read the judge’s summing up, this guy made it clear on arrest and in interview that the comments were racially aggravated and not political. He’s legally entitled to have racist views, even to share them to some degree. However, he is not legally entitled to post racist content deliberately created to incite racial hatred at the exact time when violent riots are taking place due to racial hatred. That is what this guy pleaded guilty to.
Kind of important to note that it’s likely to be in the broader context of other behaviour of his, some of which was reported in the story.
https://www.whitehavennews.co.uk/news/24513379.sellafield-worker-jailed-sharing-offensive-facebook-posts/
I really don’t care if I get flack for this, but I truly believe that what Starmer’s currently doing is a very, very slippery slope toward George Orwell-level shit.
Getting arrested for something as benign as this, is a fucking joke. Getting arrested for being near the scene of some of these riots, even if you did nothing, is a fucking joke.
It’s also hilarious that we keep being told the police are spread too thin and jails are at capacity, hence why they’re (apparently) going to lower terms and whatnot, yet within a week a ton of people are arrested and sentenced for some shitty social media posts? What?
If you get burgled or mugged, you might just about get a crime reference if you’re lucky and end-of, but showing clips of darker-skinned people walking the streets with machetes and voicing concerns about it and a week later you’re in jail?
The law states if a post is ***LIKELY*** to stir up racial hatred, it is an offence. So not that it has been definitely proven that racial hatred/violence broke out as a result of the post, it’s only down if it is likely to.
Who decides whether it is likely to or not? The state.
We have descended into an authoritarian state. Both Cons & Labour are to blame for this.
Being a dick should be a civil matter, not a criminal matter. The government shouldn’t be controlling this sort of shit.
Chap does sound like the cancer of social media, though, and my anti-Facebook bias is telling me we should ban every one of these weirdos who share political memes and opinions on social media. Sorry mum, that includes you.
Thing is, you can express all sorts of political opinions without demonising your opposition. You can engage in erudite discussions about the pros and cons of most things. I do this at the regular dinner parties I hold.
Problem is many people on Facebook etc can’t do this. They are simple people trying to express what they feel and get criminalised for it because they express themselves in ways that certain segments of society find unacceptable.
Maybe, if we invested in education, these people could join in the accepted political discourse and have their voices heard.
Kind of reminds me of the Pontius pilate jesus story.
With them recently reducing sentences of killers it’s almost like they want to lock up the ones saying words they don’t like in exchange for the freedom of the violent prisoners.
To me he is obviously a horrible person but you ought to be free to say whatever you want. At some level we must be free to discuss anything. Freedom of speech is so important to society. But I’ve seen the trouble that lies and hatred can cause. What’s the answer?
section 217 of the communications act,
it has been misused for ages now and people online were warning about it but they got called names, so no one dealt with it and now here we are.
seems like shaming people trying to warn you about issues has gone poorly in the UK.
shame
People who cheered Boris and his anti free speech Online Safety Act
Are angry at Keir Starmer… for what now?
Maybe you should have scrutinised the guy you wanted to act as a president instead of sniping at a guy who has been in charge 2mins and hasn’t changed a single law on this matter, including the slippery slope Tory ones
Do you remember the ladies who wore pictures of paragliders on their back-packs at the pro-Palestine protests shortly after October 7? Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe they only got suspended sentences.
Personally, I don’t agree with the criminal charges and sentences in both cases. I believe in free speech unless it’s a direct call for violence. I know the law in the UK says otherwise, which is a pity.
I’m also an immigrant, I’m not Muslim, but I have Muslim family members, if that matters. I’m originally from a post-communist country, and I grew up with people often repeating a joke from communist times, “Today I woke up, looked out my window at the prison across my house and made a political joke about the ruling regime. Tomorrow, I woke up and looked out the window at my house.”
I know we are not there yet, obviously, but reading these articles surely makes me think we are steadily headed that way, especially after the whole Covid lockdown fiasco. Am I allowed to say that? I honestly don’t know, and that scares me.
He’s also been twice jailed before for beating up a cab driver and another guy… feel like there’s more to this story that’s not been reported
https://www.whitehavennews.co.uk/news/17159450.jail-for-man-who-attacked-driver/
https://www.whitehavennews.co.uk/news/17135573.jailed-drinker-who-broke-mans-jaw/
(Pretty sure it’s the same guy)
I’ve seen a lot of people get arrested for whatever they say online now more, especially that one video of some guy getting arrested for misuse of electronic communications over social media or something like that. I’m not even sure whether to be against it or support it.
“I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
-Voltaire, one of the founders of liberalism.
What is happening to our nation? What happened to the inalienable rights of man to express themselves freely? Freedom of speech risks offence, but that’s a lot better an alternative to a population scared to open their mouths, strangled by an oppressive authoritarian regime that can lock you up for a differing opinion.
So let’s say a Ukrainian guy in Ukraine started posting online pictures of Russians with weapons with the caption “coming to a town near you” before the war then the invasion happened, would that be stirring racial hate and he should be jailed?
If you can’t express your opinion without calling for innocent people to be harmed maybe you should keep your opinion to yourself. Just as your freedom to swing your arms end at someone else’s face, your freedom of speech ends at the point your speech can endanger others. You can cry about it all you like, but you’re in the wrong.
I can only hope it was taking into account his previous convictions and character. I understand they are making an example of people before inciting hatred; but once we’ve gone full restriction of free expression in case it offends the wrong people, then we have a big problem. I’m worried that Charlie Hebdo style satire would now be illegal to publish in the uk.
Am guessing we didn’t see right wing thugs causing riots the last two weeks ?
Freedom of expression does not mean freedom of responsibility, if you’re deliberately stirring up hatred you put others at risk